I don't expect to win, but I'll be damned happy if we do.
From the Hun:
Final teams
Alistair Paton
The final team sheets are in – and there are no late changes for either Carlton or Richmond tonight.
Both teams will go in as named.
Same crap different year!
Need more grunt and run from the mid fielders and more leads from the forwards.
Simpleness!
Plenty of teams will be spanked by more than that by Richmond before the year is out.
Waiting waiting for the day it all changes
4 years, better team, game plan still hopeless. Our mids don't run so there's no way of opening it up for our forwards. Such a tough problem scoring. We have the players now.
Plenty of teams will be spanked by more than that by Richmond before the year is out.
Oh and that makes me feel better?????????????????
Totally disagree 24 possessions in a return match, hard at it, rusty at time. I thought he was most impressive. We all see rhings differently!!
I know he's impressive.
What i said was that he struggled to make an impact.
Yes 24 touches is good, but as i just got through saying Ed Curnow had 25 touches. Did he have a good game?
IMO a lot of Setterfields touches were very vanilla. I guess my expectations on him were higher as most of his efforts had little impact on the game.
But i do like the kid, got him in my supercoach. ;)
Totally disagree 24 possessions in a return match, hard at it, rusty at time. I thought he was most impressive. We all see rhings differently!!
Agree TC. Thought he looked lively and invested, made some good decisions. When you consider how much footy he's missed.
Thought Gibbons also had a real crack. Looked energetic and full on the whole night. Phillips and Daisy among the votes for me. Garlett quiet but did a bit in the last.
Young Walsh looked a bit off the pace, but that's to be expected.
Which is why i was saying we need a player like Polson in the team. Someone who almost gets enjoyment out of pressuring, chasing tackling the opposition.
Compared to our 2 FPs (Fas and Gibbons) who have been a non event.
As i said in the pre-match, no point having 2 dedicated FPs if you can't get the ball down there or keep it there when you do.
You're kidding if you think Polson would have made the difference. We had many, many passengers.
Fas wasn't the only bloke who looked like he hadn't played for 5 years and looked completely at sea. Newman, E Curnow, Simpson, Murphy, Thomas and Cripps kept us in it. Nice Cameos from a few and about a dozen were non-hackers.
You're kidding if you think Polson would have made the difference. We had many, many passengers.
Fas wasn't the only bloke who looked like he hadn't played for 5 years and looked completely at sea. Newman, E Curnow, Simpson, Murphy, Thomas and Cripps kept us in it. Nice Cameos from a few and about a dozen were non-hackers.
Playing Polson wouldn't have won us the game. But playing him wouldn't have hurt.......like playing fas did. Every man and his dog knew Fas was rusty. Play him in the 2's to get rid of the rust.
Ed did his best to sabotage the game.
Entries inside 50 were pathetic.
Disappointing start and end to the game, with Rance off we had a real chance but failed to take advantage....
McKay, Charlie, McGovern and Fasalo wont work that often....too slow and not enough ground skills.
Philips was handy in the ruck but the Nankervis goals really hurt us....
Some good efforts from our new players but we are still a long way off from having a decent game plan.
Disappointing start and end to the game, with Rance off we had a real chance but failed to take advantage....
McKay, Charlie, McGovern and Fasalo wont work that often....too slow and not enough ground skills.
Philips was handy in the ruck but the Nankervis goals really hurt us....
Some good efforts from our new players but we are still a long way off from having a decent game plan.
Yes, a long way.....in our 4th year. These are the things I'm looking for most rather than the result which will look after itself if we get it right.
You're kidding if you think Polson would have made the difference. We had many, many passengers.
Fas wasn't the only bloke who looked like he hadn't played for 5 years and looked completely at sea. Newman, E Curnow, Simpson, Murphy, Thomas and Cripps kept us in it. Nice Cameos from a few and about a dozen were non-hackers.
Thought Ed Curnow was ordinary, any thoughts of playing him as a forward should be shelved.....cannot deliver the footy or think his way through a forward play......
Agree on Newman...started in a dodgy fashion with some defensive efforts but his kicking is excellent and is already the go to player in a Houli like way to deliver the ball out defense.....
Plaudits to Fisher...held up well vs Dusty who probably wore him down but our man tackled well and avoided the Dusty fend off better than most....
Fasolo cost us big time
Disappointing start and end to the game, with Rance off we had a real chance but failed to take advantage....
McKay, Charlie, McGovern and Fasalo wont work that often....too slow and not enough ground skills.
Philips was handy in the ruck but the Nankervis goals really hurt us....
Some good efforts from our new players but we are still a long way off from having a decent game plan.
[/b][/u]
Sad but true
Fasolo cost us big time
Blame the selectors...Fasalo was slow with no match fitness...
We need a Higgins type........to compliment our talls.....
Fasolo cost us big time
Everyone's kicking for goal cost us big time.
Jury out at the moment.
We've added a number of players and this was their first real game together.
There were some promising signs from quite a few of those.
It will take a bit of time to sort themselves out.
What we need to see though, is a bit of stability in selections so that the understanding and teamwork can be built.
Harry, McGovern and Charlie are going to have to work on their relative positioning
Until we have a side capable of scoring 100 points in a game we're going to struggle....because that's what our opposition is most likely going to do (or go close)
Most of their goals came out the back of the stoppages where they got a run on.
That’s probably the worst I’ve seen Charlie play.
Regarding game plan, I tend to disagree, clearly we went into our shells in the first and last quarter. I don’t think many would say our game plan was no good in the 2nd and 3rd. Move the ball well and should have scored more. 3 shots and goal missed due to two blokes going for the same ball
Ed Curnow in our 22 just means we will never be a top side. His kicking now is as bad as it was on day 1. He puts forwards under pressure all the time causing turnovers . Lets's hope the new players improve quickly.
Fasolo shouldn't have been selected so it's not his fault.
As for Charlie FIGJAM Curnow? He had the worst game of his career on the back of an ordinary JLT series. Supposed to be the next Kouta but looked like Andrew Merrington.
If he wasn't who he was he would be dropped after putting up that tripe.
Fasolo cost us big time
I would argue Charlie cost us more. A more putrid game from him I have not
Seen. He needs to stop listening to the media reports about him.
As for no 5, my mum always said “if you have nothing nice to say, say nothing at all”.
Thought Ed Curnow was ordinary, any thoughts of playing him as a forward should be shelved.....cannot deliver the footy or think his way through a forward play......
Ed really hurt us with those two weak forward entries for just outside fifty. I dont know what was happening with his brother but lets hope he finds his mojo quickly. Harry is going to be a star.
So much hate!
We couldn't run out a game last year and still can't.
Spent all our petrol catching up and slowed to a walk immediately after 3 quarter time. We got jumped early and panicked and it cost us the game.
But there were so many positives. How many teams have made Richmond mentally disintegrate like they did in that 3rd quarter?
They completely panicked and repeatedly gave away silly frees and hacked it out of defense.
We have something to build on at last.
Most of their goals came out the back of the stoppages where they got a run on.
That’s probably the worst I’ve seen Charlie play.
Regarding game plan, I tend to disagree, clearly we went into our shells in the first and last quarter. I don’t think many would say our game plan was no good in the 2nd and 3rd. Move the ball well and should have scored more. 3 shots and goal missed due to two blokes going for the same ball
We won more contested footy in the 2nd/3rd, I felt thats why we came back but not having a decent game plan doesnt allow us to score as easily as other teams and we cant take advantage when we control play.
Having ball butchers like Ed Curnow doesnt help either.....
If you noticed we didnt take advantage of the new rules regarding kick outs and the Tigers allowed us the cheap short kick into the pocket then bottled the play up.....not much planning done in that area...
Tigers on the other hand had Short taking advantage of the extra room allowed and gaining extra distance....thats just smarter work tactically from the Tigers.
I’m sick of losing :'(
Tigers toyed with us.
Richmond fan at work text me at 3 quarter time and said they were going to destroy us now.
2 minutes in I could tell he was correct.
We won more contested footy in the 2nd/3rd, I felt thats why we came back but not having a decent game plan doesnt allow us to score as easily as other teams and we cant take advantage when we control play.
Having ball butchers like Ed Curnow doesnt help either.....
If you noticed we didnt take advantage of the new rules regarding kick outs and the Tigers allowed us the cheap short kick into the pocket then bottled the play up.....not much planning done in that area...
Tigers on the other hand had Short taking advantage of the extra room allowed and gaining extra distance....thats just smarter work tactically from the Tigers.
Don't we have well paid coaches as well????????????
Blame the selectors...Fasalo was slow with no match fitness...
We need a Higgins type........to compliment our talls.....
delivery into the forward line was shambolic. On the opposite side, Tigers were brutally efficient. They made Lynch look good although he poached his goals. Thought Weiters was very good all night. Being at the game, I noticed we favoured one side of the ground more. Why is that?
One other thing. Why do we dish off immediately when tackled and hand it over? We need to hold it up more.
Oh and I expected much much better than what we dished up. The umps were horrid in the first qrt but we were equal to the task. We have a very long way to go.
delivery into the forward line was shambolic. On the opposite side, Tigers were brutally efficient. They made Lynch look good although he poached his goals. Thought Weiters was very good all night. Being at the game, I noticed we favoured one side of the ground more. Why is that?
re: Lynch...did his job, could have kicked a couple more, he was there more for presence than output IMO........Weitering was ok too used the ball ok out of defense and didnt lose contact with his man like he did last season. We are restricted it seems to using Newman to deliver the footy out of the backline, really missing Docherty in this area.....
Too many passengers, Charlie Curnow included.
We were our own worst enemy for most of the game - bad decisions, poor use of the ball.....
Too many passengers, Charlie Curnow included.
We were our own worst enemy for most of the game - bad decisions, poor use of the ball.....
and the fumbles!!
Two things stood out
(1) Transition from the Tigers HBF - an absolute training drill for the Tigers. As the ball came into our forward line they simply press forward with purpose, leaving a sweeper at the back of the pack for release or to run past for a handfall. Cost us 5 goals. Coaches must get on to this - exactly the same thing happened against the bombers.
(2) Work rate/Intensity - Tigers had far more intensity right from the start and often outnumbered blues runners 3 to 1 in general play. 1st and last quarters very poor
Weitering, Jones & Plowman very good tonight/cant fault.
Walsh, Cripps, Setterfield, Cunnngham all very good
The experiment with Ed Curnow in attack has to end. He's simply a poor decision maker and good teams capitalise on silly decisions.
SPS, Newman & Thomas patchy - did some ok things but made some very poor errors. Samo doesn't waste a lot but his intensity needs to lift.
Garlett, Murphy simply not hard enough at the contest a number of times. Murphy's time as a mid is close to over and probably needs to swap with Ed Curnow.
Fasolo, McGovern talented but largely absent. Not convinced that McGovern is such a huge upgrade on Casboult especially given Cas' ability to ruck.
Phillips needs to catch the ball & I dont like McKay rucking
I'd put C Curnow on wing, he was slaughtered by Grimes.
I’m sick of losing :'(
I'm pretty sure you are not alone Micky mate.
I have had a gut full, my son is 16 years old(been a member since he was 2 weeks old), all his life bar one unusual year we have been putrid and everyone in the AFL has kicked and spat on us while we have been down.
I have tried to remain positive but he has lost all interest in footy and it breaks my heart.
I grew up in the glory times and all I see now is selfish men all doing the 9-5 thing to get a dollar, all looking after number 1, club is number 3 or 4.
I now have a very jaded view of football and chuckle when I hear , Fasolo had an off night or Setterfield was a bit rusty. It reminds of, Digby Morrell needs time to gel or Adam Hartlett needs to settle and get game time or Cameron Croad will be a great players because he has a cool name. All false dawns and all talked up by people with a glass half full attitude.
I like this type of attitude but as a Life long Carlton supporter it has worn thin and only results will satisfy now, no more talking, no more BS.
IT IS TIME.
and the fumbles!!
and the 'almost' marks....how many!
@ Jon Dora
Spot on. The Tigers transition from defence to fwd was breathtaking to watch live.
Though Cunners was good early but went quiet.
Ill say it again, our fwds never get into space. Theirs do it with ease.
H was very good.
All that said if Big H had been awarded that free late in Q3 when he chased and got the defender near the point post - and it was a free every day of the year - he goals then and it was under 2 goals....
We gave them a 6 goal head start and half our blokes were MIA.
If Charlie puts in another effort like that off to the twos....
I really like Bolts, and I rate David Teague too, but,
after tonight I reckon we have coaching issues.
The game plan should be a lot more obvious & progressed after 3 years 4 pre-seasons.
But it doesn't Al make sense, because it's seems we've had the same trouble for 10 years or more under 3 different coaches and at least 2 drastically different playing groups.
@ Jon Dora
Spot on. The Tigers transition from defence to fwd was breathtaking to watch live.
Though Cunners was good early but went quiet.
Ill say it again, our fwds never get into space. Theirs do it with ease.
H was very good.
There's get into space because the ball moves into their F50 quickly and efficiently. Our mids give ours no hope. 4 f years and We have progressed nowhere in that regard. 9 goals F 10. Like F me!
@ Jon Dora
Spot on. The Tigers transition from defence to fwd was breathtaking to watch live.
Though Cunners was good early but went quiet.
Ill say it again, our fwds never get into space. Theirs do it with ease.
H was very good.
As were our repeated cheap cough ups which made life awfully easy for them on the rebound....
Some really, really poor decision making from many of our guys - Ed Curnow one of the worst.
Plowman ended up having a good game and got dusty twice in the middle, simply awesome to see him tackled.
That said, plowman definitely took short steps in the first quarter when it was his turn
As were our repeated cheap cough ups which made life awfully easy for them on the rebound....
Some really, really poor decision making from many of our guys - Ed Curnow one of the worst.
Ed Curnow down forward costs us goals, you need class delivery when you are playing three talls and a small marking forward....
I really like Bolts, and I rate David Teague too, but,
after tonight I reckon we have coaching issues.
The game plan should be a lot more obvious & progressed after 3 years 4 pre-seasons.
But it doesn't Al make sense, because it's seems we've had the same trouble for 10 years or more under 3 different coaches and at least 2 drastically different playing groups.
x200.
I really like Bolts, and I rate David Teague too, but,
after tonight I reckon we have coaching issues.
The game plan should be a lot more obvious & progressed after 3 years 4 pre-seasons.
But it doesn't Al make sense, because it's seems we've had the same trouble for 10 years or more under 3 different coaches and at least 2 drastically different playing groups.
Teague can coach. Wouldn't mind him doing the job.
All that said if Big H had been awarded that free late in Q3 when he chased and got the defender near the point post - and it was a free every day of the year - he goals then and it was under 2 goals....
We gave them a 6 goal head start and half our blokes were MIA.
If Charlie puts in another effort like that off to the twos....
Id say off to the twos already. He carried terrible JLT Series form into the season proper. He was simply horrible.
He was crap but when you look at the alternatives you simply cannot drop Charlie.
It's not like he had much to work with either.
So much hate!
We couldn't run out a game last year and still can't.
Spent all our petrol catching up and slowed to a walk immediately after 3 quarter time. We got jumped early and panicked and it cost us the game.
But there were so many positives. How many teams have made Richmond mentally disintegrate like they did in that 3rd quarter?
They completely panicked and repeatedly gave away silly frees and hacked it out of defense.
We have something to build on at last.
Spot on, Jeza. I’m frankly stunned by how negative the majority of comments have been on this thread. I’ll save more detailed analysis for later, but I’ll say this now - I got out of my seat with a fist in the air way more often than I expected to tonight, and we actually worried them. 33 points was well within the acceptable range for me, against a top side, with a very different Carlton group.
Geez we’re soft at times
And dumb.
How many times when defending do we go to the wrong side of the contest?
At least Newman gets the basics
Would anyone like to have a crack at actually defining ‘game plan’? Or, if not, maybe describe Richmond’s ‘game plan’, ‘system’, ‘brand’ or the like, compared to ours tonight? What were our deficiencies, in a ‘game plan’ sense? Who can usefully describe and set out any other team’s ‘game plan’?
It’s bullcrap, people. It’s vocabulary invented by the media and tolerated by coaches, but it means nothing. There might be vague plans for particular games, match-ups, moments, but no one has an overriding plan other than kicking more than the opposition. Please, let’s drop that talk.
Teague can coach. Wouldn't mind him doing the job.
x3...
So much hate!
We couldn't run out a game last year and still can't.
Spent all our petrol catching up and slowed to a walk immediately after 3 quarter time. We got jumped early and panicked and it cost us the game.
But there were so many positives. How many teams have made Richmond mentally disintegrate like they did in that 3rd quarter?
They completely panicked and repeatedly gave away silly frees and hacked it out of defense.
We have something to build on at last.
So much sense!
Would anyone like to have a crack at actually defining ‘game plan’? Or, if not, maybe describe Richmond’s ‘game plan’, ‘system’, ‘brand’ or the like, compared to ours tonight? What were our deficiencies, in a ‘game plan’ sense? Who can usefully describe and set out any other team’s ‘game plan’?
It’s bullcrap, people. It’s vocabulary invented by the media and tolerated by coaches, but it means nothing. There might be vague plans for particular games, match-ups, moments, but no one has an overriding plan other than kicking more than the opposition. Please, let’s drop that talk.
Tell me in a modern, professional game that you are kidding. Those things are worked ti the nth degree as are other plans. Good sides come up with game plans regularly that win flags and others follow. Keep up!
Spot on, Jeza. I’m frankly stunned by how negative the majority of comments have been on this thread. I’ll save more detailed analysis for later, but I’ll say this now - I got out of my seat with a fist in the air way more often than I expected to tonight, and we actually worried them. 33 points was well within the acceptable range for me, against a top side, with a very different Carlton group.
The negativity from me won't be directed at players. Charlie's, like everyone, is going to have to odd patch where he's out of form. I'll live with that. My issue is a lack of a working game plan, after 4 years, so we can score. That's a coaching issue. I see good things from individuals that make me very happy but without a functioning game plan we won't score. That's the crux and into a 4th year I want to know why.
The negativity from me won't be directed at players. Charlie's, like everyone, is going to have to odd patch where he's out of form. I'll live with that. My issue is a lack of a working game plan, after 4 years, so we can score. That's a coaching issue. I see good things from individuals that make me very happy but without a functioning game plan we won't score. That's the crux and into a 4th year I want to know why.
Spot on Jim.
Spot on, Jeza. I’m frankly stunned by how negative the majority of comments have been on this thread. I’ll save more detailed analysis for later, but I’ll say this now - I got out of my seat with a fist in the air way more often than I expected to tonight, and we actually worried them. 33 points was well within the acceptable range for me, against a top side, with a very different Carlton group.
X2
Slowww starts, lousy tired finishes and 2 quarters of very good football. Where have I see that before?
There was some merit in what I saw. No sense bagging any one player just yet, but I expect much more from the Curnows.
Still far from sold on Bolton
Most of what I saw has already been said. So much the same, so disappointing. Another two goal-less quarters. Pathetic.
So much hype over blokes that are very average footballers at the end of the day. Fasolo...MacGovern.... Meh. Casboult is very limited but we aren't paying him 750 k to contribute F all. And he rucks.
Chuck needs to ditch the white boots and start doing the basics, like holding chest marks.
Been banging on about it for years, we need quality users off half back to vastly improve and hasten our ball movement, which is criminally slow. Losing Doc and Willo has been catastrophic. I can see what they are doing with Garlett, but he lacks any assurance with ball in hand and is a panic merchant anyway. I'd try SPS as a permanent in defence, like so many others of our young midfielders he plays in spurts on ball, which leads to opposition periods of dominance. But at least in defense his ball use is incisive and he can tackle. As midfielders Dow, Walsh, SPS, Cunners ET AL play bits and pieces but none play full quarters let alone a full game. Where's the consistency?
Murphy is finished in an on ball role, caught too easily, Ed needs a simple tagging job as he ain't a smart player. Fit and persistent yes, smart no. Needs a see ball get ball hack it on role. Cost us four goals with brain freezes I reckon.
Weitering being shoe horned into a innapropriate role close to goal will ruin him. Did OK I thought but gees, why can't we play him higher up the ground?
Overall we're better than last year, which means we're less crap but still looking very much a bottom four side at best... With bottom two a distinct possibility is Cripps misses games. All of which means Bolton is finished at this rate.
Would anyone like to have a crack at actually defining ‘game plan’? Or, if not, maybe describe Richmond’s ‘game plan’, ‘system’, ‘brand’ or the like, compared to ours tonight? What were our deficiencies, in a ‘game plan’ sense? Who can usefully describe and set out any other team’s ‘game plan’?
It’s bullcrap, people. It’s vocabulary invented by the media and tolerated by coaches, but it means nothing. There might be vague plans for particular games, match-ups, moments, but no one has an overriding plan other than kicking more than the opposition. Please, let’s drop that talk.
I noticed that Richmond have tactics we dont.
They are better at using space than we are.
They are better at incidental knock ons to team mates because everyone knows that they are not necessarily going to take possession. You can get lucky by design.
They aren't just banging in it into the forwards they hit up targets.
We are work in progress and were better able to manufacture space in the corridor but our final ball forward was often a bomb it and hope ball.
Most of what I saw has already been said. So much the same, so disappointing. Another two goal-less quarters. Pathetic.
So much hype over blokes that are very average footballers at the end of the day. Fasolo...MacGovern.... Meh. Casboult is very limited but we aren't paying him 750 k to contribute F all. And he rucks.
Chuck needs to ditch the white boots and start doing the basics, like holding chest marks.
Been banging on about it for years, we need quality users off half back to vastly improve and hasten our ball movement, which is criminally slow. Losing Doc and Willo has been catastrophic. I can see what they are doing with Garlett, but he lacks any assurance with ball in hand and is a panic merchant anyway. I'd try SPS as a permanent in defence, like so many others of our young midfielders he plays in spurts on ball, which leads to opposition periods of dominance. But at least in defense his ball use is incisive and he can tackle. As midfielders Dow, Walsh, SPS, Cunners ET AL play bits and pieces but none play full quarters let alone a full game. Where's the consistency?
Murphy is finished in an on ball role, caught too easily, Ed needs a simple tagging job as he ain't a smart player. Fit and persistent yes, smart no. Needs a see ball get ball hack it on role. Cost us four goals with brain freezes I reckon.
Weitering being shoe horned into a innapropriate role close to goal will ruin him. Did OK I thought but gees, why can't we play him higher up the ground?
Overall we're better than last year, which means we're less crap but still looking very much a bottom four side at best... With bottom two a distinct possibility is Cripps misses games. All of which means Bolton is finished at this rate.
I fear more than a a skerrick of truth here. We need to have some serious thoughts on how best to deploy the talent we now have. Yes I saw some improvements from last year but was disappointed overall, especially in that we could manage to be competitive for only half the game. We still look nervous and fumbly too often.
I reckon we have the bulk of the pieces, although a few vital ones are missing, but some are not being utilised in their optimal role/position due to needs.... Or coaching bloodymindedness.
As an aside, Cripps was described by MacAveney (a gushing, syncophantic commentator that I loathe) as "herculean". A more apt moniker I couldn't fathom. Imagine if he was in a decent side, the commentary would be Dusty-esque.
Tigers have pace, they have synergy, they have stability, they have skill, they have experience, they have runs on the board. They're not flag favourites for nothing.
A 6 goal loss is to be expected given the obvious disparity between the teams, across all areas.
In the 2nd and 3rd we looked assured.
In the 4th, they freaked, fumbled - as soon as I saw one of them go backwards I knew we were done for - no backing of themselves from there and no one wanting to take it on.
Murphy played great in the 3rd, couldn’t believe he got run down in the 4th - how can there be no awareness?
Thought SPS was super solid, I liked McGovern, feels like that one was winnable and worried that will set off another year of fizzing out when the heat is turned up!
And yes Tigers have a knack of pushing the ball forward - so many times I said that was Arsey - which means it’s not Arsey!
Also totally over seeing us knock it towards the opposition goals trying to get it to a player - never works and they get an advantage of us moving it closer to goal for them! The junior basketball stuff!
......................... feels like that one was winnable and worried that will set off another year of fizzing out when the heat is turned up!
Have to disagree Micky0 - we never looked like winning, not even 2 goals down. Tigers were clearly in control the whole time.
Yep... Threw us a bone so they can get the guaranteed four point game first up again next year. Never in doubt.
Tigers are solid, but no Rance... They'll be making up the numbers late in the year. Wouldnt want to lose Nankervis either.
One positive from last night - no injuries. After our recent Annus horribilis, that's almost worth 4 points on its own.
Setterfield was one big plus for us.
24 disposals in 66% game time. Give him 100% game time and it's around 40 disposals.
Pretty good for a kid playing his 3rd senior game.
He will be a gun.
Have to disagree Micky0 - we never looked like winning, not even 2 goals down. Tigers were clearly in control the whole time.
So when the tigs spent most of the third quarter trying to hack the ball out of their defense to anywhere but here they looked in total control?
We must have been at different games.
I think we're a good chance to beat Port next week based on what I saw last night.
There seems to have been an expectation here that the 18th team from last year would beat the best team from last year.
Great to be passionate but really?
Setterfield was one big plus for us.
24 disposals in 66% game time. Give him 100% game time and it's around 40 disposals.
Pretty good for a kid playing his 3rd senior game.
He will be a gun.
Agree - I thought he was excellent. Made a couple of mistakes but the pressure was intense and looked composed most of the time. Super player in the making.
Took on the top team and beat them for disposals, clearances, smashed them in the centre clearances and tackles. With a team of relative kids.
Have to disagree Micky0 - we never looked like winning, not even 2 goals down. Tigers were clearly in control the whole time.
BS.
Quite insightful....
https://www.carltonfc.com.au/video/2019-03-21/r1-bolton-postmatch
What was with all our running under the ball for marks ??, was there Helium in the footy ?
Oh & don't get me started about the horrid little dinky kick ins after a behind....it was just a photocopy everytime & the Tigers blocked it off at the same half back spot !!
We didn't even attempt to use the extra space available to get us further up the ground.
They got given a 4 goal head start with some generous umpiring.
1 of them was charity to Tom Lynch thanks to Jack Riewoldt flying on Liam Jones to keep him out of the contest without making a realistic attempt to mark. He got penalised for that a couple of times later, but the damage was done.
Another was a phantom free kick, and 50 metre penalty for no good reason which put them in scoring range.
Had they umpired that evenly all night, there would have been 6 50 metre penalties that they should have paid.
Instead they put the whistle away. There were a few bewildering decisions that you just couldnt work out, particularly surrounding incorrect disposal.
Largely, we were our own worst enemy and the fumbles cost us more than anything else did.
So when the tigs spent most of the third quarter trying to hack the ball out of their defense to anywhere but here they looked in total control?
We must have been at different games.
I think we're a good chance to beat Port next week based on what I saw last night.
There seems to have been an expectation here that the 18th team from last year would beat the best team from last year.
Great to be passionate but really?
Momentum shifts and the odd lairy moment are inevitable in any game of football, are they not ?
There was not a single moment watching that game, when I thought we would win, or could win, or deserved to win. So in that respect, yes, we probably were watching different games.
Being passionate or dispassionate is not the issue. There's a particular brand of psychedelically-laced pre season Kool Aid that seems to be very popular around here, which I simply don't drink.
People's attitudes are opinions are very entrenched. You will read folks on here who are absolutely convinced that we have a good list, a list that is not the problem, a list that can win regularly, despite the rather glaring fact that there is little evidence to support such a claim. Apart from the obvious names (Cripps, Doc) etc., most of our list is either very young or very ordinary, and any claims that it's a great list are at worst hopelessly incorrect, and at best unproven. Naturally, when the sh1t hits the fan, such posters have already convinced themselves that the coach is the problem, and on and on it goes......
People's attitudes are opinions are very entrenched.
Including, very clearly, yours Paul...
Including, very clearly, yours Paul...
Dude.......seriously ?
BTW...Walsh, in his first game.....was excellent....his composure (for the most part) was years above his age & experience. Zach Fisher is a real goer....& Patty Dow did some great things (apart from one horrid shot for goal) We are going to have a top notch midfield in a year or two.
The day we don't have to play Jones in defense will be a turning point...and I'm still not sold on Weitering.
Thought Ed Curnow was ordinary, any thoughts of playing him as a forward should be shelved.....cannot deliver the footy or think his way through a forward play......
Agree on Newman...started in a dodgy fashion with some defensive efforts but his kicking is excellent and is already the go to player in a Houli like way to deliver the ball out defense.....
Plaudits to Fisher...held up well vs Dusty who probably wore him down but our man tackled well and avoided the Dusty fend off better than most....
Ed curnow is a favourite son, but he butchers the footy. His delivery inside 50 is awful. It costs us goals, and is a key reason for why we seem to turn the ball over more often than not. It will be difficult to cut ties with Ed, but until we do, we won't win a flag IMO.
Ed curnow is a favourite son, but he butchers the footy. His delivery inside 50 is awful. It costs us goals, and is a key reason for why we seem to turn the ball over more often than not. It will be difficult to cut ties with Ed, but until we do, we won't win a flag IMO.
Ed is a major liability in the forward 50.
Cost us last night.
To digress, watch the last 20 minutes of the 3rd quarter - we were ALL over them.... but for a few poor efforts by Ed Curnow and younger brother, in particular, we would have had a lead at 3/4 time.
Also, the run down by big H with 4 minutes to go - was a holding the ball free to Harry every day of the week. Umpires definitely did us no favours.
First lets give the opposition some due, Richmond have been the best team over the past 1 and a half seasons, aside from a poor prelim they could very well be sitting on back to back flags and there wouldn't be a person surprised by that. I actually said to people that a 6 goal loss was what I'm expecting.
Second our game plan has changed, if you could not see when we had the game on our terms in the second and third quarter, we got the ball to defensive 50 then looked to get it into the middle which opened up the forward half and created out scoring chances.
In the first quarter Richmonds excellent full ground defence, something they have been working on as a group for many seasons now, pushed us to the boundary line and they did the same in the last as well.
We had poor hands over the ball as a whole and kicked poorly in front of goal, but we tackled better than I've seen a Carlton team do in a few years. We hit more targets, and ran as a group with overlap, but made a few stupid choices in trying to create the run as well.
Just again, we finished a poor last and they finished two games clear on top of the ladder. We bought in some nice players that all need game time to reach their potential, Richmond bought in an AA full forward, so again was this result a surprise?
I thought the world was ending when we were 1-40, however the team showed fight and got back into the game through hard work, and I didn't see Richmond take it easy at any stage, we just played better than them for half a game.
Looking at the age and experience demographics for the teams last night
Richmond games 1 to 30 - 2
Carlton games 1 to 30 - 7
Richmond games 31 to 60 - 5
Carlton games 31 to 60 - 7
Richmond games 61 to 100 - 3
Carlton games 61 to 100 - 2
Richmond Games 101 to 200 - 7
Carlton games 101 - 200 - 3
Richmond Games 200 + - 5
Carlton Games 200 + 3
Richmond age 17-20 2
Carlton age 17-20 3
Richmond age 21-24 - 5
Carlton Age 21-24 - 11
Richmond age 25-30 - 15
Carlton age 25-30 - 5
Richmond 31+ 0
Carlton age 31+ 3
Over Half of our side has played less than 60 games
Over Half their side has played more than 100 games
15 of their 22 are in what is considered the prime of their careers age wise.
We have 3 past it and 14 yet to hit their prime.
It's a simple equation, they are good team with their players in the right demographic with games played and age
We are young and inexperienced and there is nothing to remedy that except time
Setterfield was one big plus for us.
24 disposals in 66% game time. Give him 100% game time and it's around 40 disposals.
Pretty good for a kid playing his 3rd senior game.
He will be a gun.
Agreed. Like the look of him and looked assured at times. Only went at 50% efficiency tonight but for a third games I'll take that. Can only get better. SOS had big raps on him and I can see why. Another small piece of the puzzle solved.
BTW the umpiring was shocking, they ever had yellow and black shorts on. How did Lynch get his first goal, by Riewoldt jumping on Jones and making no real effort to get the ball in the air.
Second goal, we laid a tackle that spilled free should have been dropping the ball, instead it rolled over to a Richmond players that snapped a goal.
BTW the umpiring was shocking, they ever had yellow and black shorts on. How did Lynch get his first goal, by Riewoldt jumping on Jones and making no real effort to get the ball in the air.
Second goal, we laid a tackle that spilled free should have been dropping the ball, instead it rolled over to a Richmond players that snapped a goal.
AFL Umpiring always has and always will favor the established and big name players under the influence of the crowd.
What irks me more than the poor umpiring is hearing some Nthmond fans laugh at the double standard, they are quickly become as bad as the lot over at CheatsFC. Nthmond fans have learned, effectively coached or otherwise, that using their mob voice will influence the umpires to the point they call penalties before they even occur. The effect is a form of precognition and the AFL has chosen to ignore it despite being introduced to technologies that eliminate the effects on officials. They want mob rule.
Personally, Carlton fans have never got it, last night we were effectively silent barring the occasional polite applause. Even our President shows no emotion. Yet we demand the team play with bottomless spirit, it's a complete double standard. If you don't stand up for the kids on the field, if you don't make your voice heard over the filthy hoard, then you won't be favored by the decisions of officials who are under mob influence.
Question 15. 10 marks. Complete this syllogism :
All superstar players get preferential treatment from the umpires.
Cripps is a superstar player.
Therefore____________________.
At least we have one such player.
@Raydan. Great post (#84) as always.
Well that was crapFUL.
Our ability to win the ball and drive it forward into the waiting arms of the opposition thereby allowing their return entry and score should be a stat. We would be the ladder leaders.
Of the new blokes (non-draft) I thought Newman was the best. He's slow but at least he can kick.
Walsh was super impressive. Looks like we've got a good one there.
Charlie continues his poor JLT form. When you get the bronx cheers taking a mark it's a dead give away.
Ed, Gibbons and Fasolo up forward - major MAJOR fail.
McGovern, not fantastic but does compete. Harry I think has improved somewhat and at this stage has passed Charlie??! WTF!
Murphy on the wing I think works and will extend his career, I believe, for some time.
Probably the best game I've seen Thomas play for a while.
Weitering started well but got worse towards the end (tired?)
Jones, rock solid I thought but will probably be getting a holiday for the off the ball incident with Reiwoldt.
Fish, love him but a bit rusty. Will improve
Cripps, bloody hell. What a player.
Phillips battled hard but his opponent kicked 3 goals. Tighten up.
Cunningham, SPS, Plowman, Dow were serviceable without being fantastic
Simmo played a good game I thought. Continues to surprise, but for how much longer?
Setterfield, not too bad. Was fumbly which is how he played in the JLT so that's a concern but willing to give him a few more weeks. Missing a goal from directly in front 40 metres out doesn't help.
I'm not going to go on about game plans. There's isn't real scientific nor is ours but they execute better (see my first point). However we do tend to over handball. Rather handball to a teammate that take the responsibility of kicking. Why?
Thought we'd do better, but that start killed us. Knew we'd spent our tickets in quarters 2 & 3 catching up. Thought Rance going down might help but we were too tired tired in the last to take advantage.
Very, vary annoyed at that effort.
Now that the dust has settled.
I guess it is important to factor in that the Tiggers are an established group who are at the stage of 'tinkering'. Whereas we're at the stage of having completed a major overhaul and are now just beginning to piece it together.
I hope Charlie isn't soaking up too much of the adoration from the outside. His game last night was appalling, his opponents owned him. No escaping that.
That brain fade from Jones on Jack was dumb, dumb, dumb... won't be easy to replace as he'll probably get a week. I'd be tempted to give Brackets (or maybe Charlie, might help him to get some confidence/form?) the gig down back next week and bring in another small/medium forward. (or put Charlie on the ball and give Murph more time in the forward line... yes, got my doubts about 3 pillars up forward & Ed C.).
64 pts is a pathetic final scoreline. Keeping the opposition, and such a good opposition, to 97 pts is
almost acceptable. Take out our usual 30 odd minutes of 'going missing', and their ability to capitalise on that and you'd find they were more a 75-80 pt side.
Ed C is a worry. Not a forward's clacker and it's probably too late to teach him new tricks. Someone else said it and I tend to agree that when Ed can't make the best 22, we're on the right track... and I don't like saying that because he's been a ripper with a heart as big as the MCG.
Our best newbie last night was Newman. Bloody ripper. 12 rebound 50s speaks for itself. Has a crack. 100 game player for us. If you put Williamson on the other HBF that's a pair of deadly lefties with dash and footy smarts. Drool.
When Setterfield and Walsh improve their disposal efficiency, look out.
I hope we resist the temptation to make changes for next week (except for the compulsory change of Jones), especially dumping anyone who didn't perform well last night.
I'm far more optimistic about next week than I was about last night.
I really think this group needs a big win, to know how it feels to own their opposition, it'll be the shot in the arm our group needs to take the next step.
Seriously, this is becoming embarrassing watching this football club. Every year I hope that I see some sort of improvement, only for it to be flushed down the toilet after the first few games of the season.
People will say, well if you can't see improvement you weren't seeing the green shoots or Sam Walsh or Will Setterfield. Jesus, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about blokes being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year who simply can't do the basics of the f^&king game. I'm talking about chest marks, field kicking, hand balling and kicking for goal.
I mean for f^&ks sake, what do these d^&kheads do all summer? We dropped about 8 easy chest marks and mind you, this was from a myriad of players, SPS, CC, Cuningham etc. Why? How many out of the full? 6 or 7? It's like we're watching an U12s match who were playing the U18s. They were handling the ball like it was a bar of soap, yet Bitchmond didn't have any issues.
Why when we hand ball to a team mate it's always to their feet and never to advantage where they don't have to break stride? Kicking into the forward line is more by hope than by any design. Why can't our forwards ever get separation from their defender? Yet the opposition seem to never have an issue doing so with ours? Fuuuuuucckkk! Is it too hard to expect these simple things are a non negotiable when it comes to identifying players? 20 years in the cellar, you'd think we could identify at least a few players with some skill.
Charlie Curnow needs to stop drinking his own bath water and getting some skills. I don't think I've ever seen a player other than Marc Murphy go through the motions like he did last night. And on to my perennial favourite whipping boy Marc. How soft is this bloke? I mean really, he turns it over so often during a game that's it's almost like he's a member of the opposing team. When he does kick it in the general direction of a team mate it's always got too much air time or it's on top of their head. Such a hack!
The sad part is and I'm not sure why, most of you laud him as being skillful and an invaluable part of the club. He is one of the main reasons we are where we are as a club. The lack of on field leadership from a supposed senior statesman for the club is glaring not to mention the pi55 poor attack on the football at virtually every contest he's involved in does not bode well for the young kids when they see that. I feel for the likes of Cripps who leaves it all out there every week and bleeds for this club and likewise Judd before him.
Marc has been privileged to play with these two blokes and yet has learned nothing. Wow! Don't get me wrong, I'm not expecting him to be Cripps, but I expect him to have presence and go when it's his turn to go, which all too often he fails to do. Young Sam Walsh has more impact on the game and gives more of himself and that was his first game.
I know alot of you will mention his second or third quarter, not sure which, where he kicked a goal and actually got involved in the game. OK, fair enough, but ask yourself, where was he the other 3 quarters and previous 12 years. I think is says alot about the bloke when you guys didn't even have a thread for Marc congratulating him on his 250th. Secretly you think the same, yet don't want to be the one to "shoot Bambi".
So it looks like another long year and mountain of disappointments coming up. It's getting to the point where I'm not sure why I put myself though watching the St Kilda of the 21st century week in week out. Yes people, that's who we are. 5 spoons in 20 years is not only St Kilda like, it's now Carlton like. Never thought I would ever say that, but there you have it, the club is officially a joke.
Don't get up in my grill and say that's an over reaction after a round one loss, I'm telling you, this is no aberration. This is situation normal at the Carlton Football Club and has been for the last 20 years. 2019 will be no different.
I thought we won enough football, but our use of the ball was poor, why?
One thought is that in general our aggression towards a opponents is low, it's not helped by CheatsTV doing it's best to cook our goose. Example the endless replays of Jones collecting Riewoldt versus completely ignoring Cripps being struck int he side of the head while trying to mark.
But our lack of vicious aggression is evident, while our attack on the football was grand, it's the Hodge factor we lack. Example, Cotchin does his best to hospitalise Cripps in a marking contest, we defend with gentile spoils and shepherds. Of course I realise it's men versus boys still, but we are not all boys. The irony is hearing our coach express concerns about Rance having watched him regularly "stumble" and collide knees first into forwards.
I've stated before and there is nothing from last night that makes me change this opinion, we play football like our primary objective is to leave the field safely for the trip home, at AFL level all that does is make us easy roadkill for the vultures.
Charlie Curnow needs to stop drinking his own bath water and getting some skills.
Watching last night I thought he needs VFL time. No doubt he has all the physical abilities, but almost zero confidence and presence. We've seen better from Charlie, but last night he was Capperesque.
He looks like a player who needs to go and kick 12 goals in a match at VFL level, but I suspect he'll need to be touched up by some B-grader at VFL level before he ever switches on.
We missed SpecialK last night, Nankervis was effectively BoG, and Phillips has little physical presence under the new body on body rules. McKay was almost ineffective in the ruck despite his height advantages, unfortunately McKay shows almost zero aggression, and it's aggression that gives KPPs the advantage. It's not his fault he is not and has never been a ruckmen, size means nothing good rucks play well due to an attitude.
Look at the disrespect coming from Riewoldt towards Jones, Riewoldt basically just tried to smash Jones to create opportunities for Nthmond's small forwards, in many cases Riewoldt never even came close to touching the ball yet was not penalised and we made no effort to respond in kind. As a team you cannot allow that, it's gutless and it leads to being bullied and dominated, there is no nice way of putting it. Bullies fold when you stand your ground, walking away lets them continue without reprise.
But our lack of vicious aggression is evident, while our attack on the football was grand, it's the Hodge factor we lack. Example, Cotchin does his best to hospitalise Cripps in a marking contest, we defend with gentile spoils and shepherds. Of course I realise it's men versus boys still, but we are not all boys. The irony is hearing our coach express concerns about Rance having watched him regularly "stumble" and collide knees first into forwards.
I've stated before and there is nothing from last night that makes me change this opinion, we play football like our primary objective is to leave the field safely for the trip home, at AFL level all that does is make us easy roadkill for the vultures.
You can thank Marc for setting the finest of examples during his tenure at the club. All together now, THAAAAANNNNKKKKSSS MAAAAARRRRCCCC!
As someone who enjoys keeping a casual eye on stats, over the last season or 2 we consistently win the hard ball - clearances, cp's etc. are usually in our favour. Where we fall down (over and over again) are I50's and marks I50. It's like a disease for which we have no cure. Far too much dicking around between the arcs. Lack of composure ? Lack of skill ? Who knows. But we're not ball starved, that's for sure.
And tackles is another area where we are not always as dominant as we should be.
As someone who enjoys keeping a casual eye on stats, over the last season or 2 we consistently win the hard ball - clearances, cp's etc. are usually in our favour.
Are the stats a little misleading PaulP, what is the point at which a possession becomes a CP or clearance, does it have to be an effective disposal?
If it has to be an effective disposal it's hard to see how we could win the CPs and Clearances. If not, then I agree, we win heaps of contested football but rarely make much use of it!
I missed the start guys ... who was on the bench?
Spanner touches a raw nerve with me. Jones will get a week for nailing Riewoldt, but the hatchet job on him from the media makes me vomit. Burton got off the same rap last year BTW.
There are so many ways within the rules of the game to intimidate the opposition. I'm not happy that Rance got hurt, but Phillips had the right idea... If you come in to kill a contest and I go all in to mark and you get crunched...thats football. Been watching guys do this with impunity for years, were you watching Levi? If a defender drops into the hole....
Crikey, some peanut did it to SPS in the last (adjacent to the tiges RH point post). Obvious it was an attempted take down... No free.
You can thank Marc for setting the finest of examples during his tenure at the club. All together now, THAAAAANNNNKKKKSSS MAAAAARRRRCCCC!
Senior player leadership has been an issue since the early 2000's.
Once Ratten and Hickmott retired we had little leadership
I have said it plenty of times, we had too many blokes who would not commit to the contest.
Guys like Nick Stevens, Camporeale and Justin Murphy educated the younger guys how to avoid the contest.
Last night, when the game was in the balance Murphy avoided contact.
He would have been grilled for it if he were a Swans or Hawks player, yet we made him skipper.
If not for Judd and Cripps we would have won a lot more wooden spoons
You can thank Marc for setting the finest of examples during his tenure at the club. All together now, THAAAAANNNNKKKKSSS MAAAAARRRRCCCC!
Spanner, I realise you are not a fan of sMurph, but I have to keep in mind it was actually sMurph injured more than once going head-to-head with blokes like Hodge and Selwood. You don't need to be the captain to influence in this manner, it's an attitude, and even if he tries sMurph won't have much impact in that regard he's just too small. So it's dumb to allow an accumulator to remove themselves from the game by trying to be an enforcer, I suspect that is exactly what the opposition want. But look at our history, we let Judd smash himself into the ground, and now we are about to do the same to Cripps it seems!
Other than Daisy I saw very little from medium sized blokes of bigger last night that gave me any confidence, go back and watch Nankervis, Grimes, Rance and even Nthmond's new kid Balta by comparison, they are not just winning the football, but they do so in a manner to physically hurt or intimidate opponents.
My real concern is the recruiting mix, we seems to favour the gentile types over all over features. Robinson was our last real thug type and we kiboshed him toot sweet, I don't by the reason why, I suspect it was because our timid group was fearful of retributions because of Robinson's on-field behavior. We don't want the conflict, so we always lose the game of chicken, and the opposition rely on that fact!
Well done Fly, you got one right ????????????
pre game thread, Flyboy77 said:
“The last 4 clashes with the Tigers...
1. We would have 1 or 2 poor quarters.
2. We get overrun in the last quarter (young blokes getting tired).
Will the trend stop tonight?”
Spanner touches a raw nerve with me. Jones will get a week for nailing Riewoldt, but the hatchet job on him from the media makes me vomit. Burton got off the same rap last year BTW.
There are so many ways within the rules of the game to intimidate the opposition. I'm not happy that Rance got hurt, but Phillips had the right idea... If you come in to kill a contest and I go all in to mark and you get crunched...thats football. Been watching guys do this with impunity for years, were you watching Levi? If a defender drops into the hole....
Crikey, some peanut did it to SPS in the last (adjacent to the tiges RH point post). Obvious it was an attempted take down... No free.
Don't get me started, apparently I'm heavily biased, but I fear we are already teaching blokes like McKay the wrong way to do things!
Don't get me started, apparently I'm heavily biased, but I fear we are already teaching blokes like McKay the wrong way to do things!
Anyone want to tell me why Rance got away with winding McGovern in the second quarter.
Weitering is the big liability. He is not up to 'holding' a KPF. His body language is dreadful, some say 'laconic', I say defeatist and timid. Certainly slow off the mark and reactive. Needs to attack the ball as his body work is non-existent. He let the ball slip 'out the back' of the pack, which is as cardinal sin, the Tigers always convert these opportunities.
You'd think after 3 years Weits would be throwing his considerable size around spitting a few packs open and charging out of defence. Nah...Not this bloke. Doesn't look hungry enough. I would move him up forward again, as he seems an OK mark....play Paddy Kerr at full back.
And I wonder why we never came out on the ground during the warm up, just to get a feel for the greasy conditions. Do we ever train at night with a slippery yellow ball ? It didn't seem like we had with the fumbling and bumbling efforts last night.
As for Murphy, I don't think it set the right tone pre-match with the whole 'Love-in' for his milestone. For God sake they were playing Crowded House on the PA, hardly going to psych the players up for battle !
And the relevance of Whitnall presenting the match ball...what was that in aid of ? We need to move on from our disastrous recent history , not glorify blokes who had to attend fat farms.
Focus on the here and now,...we have players that can write a new chapter and put us back in the finals picture.
If we believe some of what is written on here, this supposed "soft c0ck" player attitude has persisted for at least a decade. Which means that apart from a few like Simmo, Murph, Krooz, many of the "originators" are now long gone. Our list has also turned over several times in these years. All coaches, recruiters, football department people and other support staff have also changed. Yet supposedly this problem persists ? All because all of a little bloke who couldn't scare a school girl ? Gee, he must pretty tough if he can hold influence over other players, coaches, recruiters etc.
I call BS. Massive, massive BS.
Disorganised….was the theme for the night in terms of our forward line.
It was like a dog's breakfast.
At times we had Harry down on the wing and McGovern deep in defence….couldn't find Charlie!
Forward entries were still just a "bomb it in and hope" in most cases.
Small forwards we're largely ineffective.
If there's a structure there it's hard to see.
Disorganised….was the theme for the night in terms of our forward line.
It was like a dog's breakfast.
At times we had Harry down on the wing and McGovern deep in defence….couldn't find Charlie!
Forward entries were still just a "bomb it in and hope" in most cases.
Small forwards we're largely ineffective.
If there's a structure there it's hard to see.
BANG!! And whilst only a praccy mactch, the structure in the Cheats JLT game was miles better.
Interesting that Riewoldt’s stats and ratings were lower than Charlie’s. Maybe both teams are coming to terms with new structures. Difference was that they had others who could chip in.
Interesting that Riewoldt’s stats and ratings were lower than Charlie’s. Maybe both teams are coming to terms with new structures. Difference was that they had others who could chip in.
Only because they don't count victims and scalps, Riewoldt would be miles ahead, he deliberately jumped into at least three of our players!
Disorganised….was the theme for the night in terms of our forward line.
It was like a dog's breakfast.
At times we had Harry down on the wing and McGovern deep in defence….couldn't find Charlie!
Forward entries were still just a "bomb it in and hope" in most cases.
Small forwards we're largely ineffective.
If there's a structure there it's hard to see.
3 talls down forward and a small marking forward was too slow for a night game and if there is one team in the comp that has three decent tall backs its the Tigers.
We selected what they would have wanted....dumb, especially with Fasalo unfit and looking like he needed time in the NB's to get into shape.
We play Port this week who are smaller and lighter down back and our talls if they pull the finger out and the weather is ok can give us an advantage.
The problem we have is no decent delivery as well...dont know what rocket scientist decided Ed Curnow was forward material, cant kick and takes way too long to dispose of the footy...
Structure down back was also poor with regard to kick ins.....
BANG!! And whilst only a praccy mactch, the structure in the Cheats JLT game was miles better.
A real concern for me is this;
It looks like the Nthmond VFL structures and tactics mirrored the AFL structures, Teague and a bunch of our MC were at the VFL game as reported in the VFL thread, yet come AFL game time we looked basically unprepared for what Nthmond did!
The problem we have is no decent delivery as well...dont know what rocket scientist decided Ed Curnow was forward material, cant kick and takes way too long to dispose of the footy...
It's amazing EB1. I have a bunch of work associates who have only a cursory knowledge of AFL, they are basketball types and two of them are involved in coaching NBA / Metro juniors. But they watch big AFL games like last night.
Both of them stated the slow ball movement of the Curnow boys crueled any chances we had. They basically stated by the end of the game Nthmond setup to prefer Charlie and Ed winning the football knowing they would hold it up and give Nthmond defense time to setup. Apparently preferentially surrendering possession like this, to slow thinkers or movers, is as deliberate basketball tactic to tilt the turnover stats in your favor.
The people at work even though they are at best casual observers saw through it, what about our coaches?
It's amazing EB1. I have a bunch of work associates who have only a cursory knowledge of AFL, they are basketball types and two of them are involved in coaching NBA / Metro juniors. But they watch big AFL games like last night.
Both of them stated the slow ball movement of the Curnow boys crueled any chances we had. They basically stated by the end of the game Nthmond setup to prefer Charlie and Ed winning the football knowing they would hold it up and give Nthmond defense time to setup. Apparently preferentially surrendering possession like this, to slow thinkers or movers, is as deliberate basketball tactic to tilt the turnover stats in your favor.
The people at work even though they are at best casual observers saw through it, what about our coaches?
LP...Tigers move it quick and even use the tap on to advantage to keep the ball rolling their way.....they love that overlap play with the joe the goose goal and work hard for each other to make it happen.
Its a supporter nightmare watching it unfold as you can see 2-3 plays ahead whats going to happen if they get the break after those tap ons to advantage.
Ed is a tagger but doesnt have much offensive nous and plays old school footy. Charlie looked like he was expecting the ball to find him rather than him get the ball and maybe the bathwater got a bit high and he has been swallowing it rather than bathing in it....
LP...Tigers move it quick and even use the tap on to advantage to keep the ball rolling their way.....they love that overlap play with the joe the goose goal and work hard for each other to make it happen.
Its a supporter nightmare watching it unfold as you can see 2-3 plays ahead whats going to happen if they get the break after those tap ons to advantage.
Ed is a tagger but doesnt have much offensive nous and plays old school footy. Charlie looked like he was expecting the ball to find him rather than him get the ball and maybe the bathwater got a bit high and he has been swallowing it rather than bathing in it....
I accept that, but we have how many professional full-time AFL coaches on the club payroll?
In fairness, I thought we held them up well in the 2nd and 3rd, but you never know if that is because Nthmond were in conservation mode. If they were conserving then we must be treated with disdain at AFL level!
Geez we’re soft at times
And dumb.
How many times when defending do we go to the wrong side of the contest?
At least Newman gets the basics
You have to be kidding we were soft ,I dont know what game you were watching .We played a team that was favorite to win the grand final last year ,we had 6 new players of which 2 hadnt player for a year.Apart from 2 x 5minute spells in the 1st qtr and 4th qtr we were in the game . Charlie sadly had a bad game ,give the guy a break it was the first game of the year ,lets see what happens in the next 7 rounds Give the team some credit ,we sound like Richmond supporters
IMO, Bolton is a coach in the Clarkson / Neil Craig mold, with a preference for systems, possession footy, hitting up a loose man etc. I don't think the Ratten / Dimma freewheeling approach is his thing. Whether this is ideological, or he doesn't trust himself or the team, I don't know.
Like any style / game plan, it looks great when it comes off, awful when it doesn't.
You have to be kidding we were soft ,I dont know what game you were watching .We played a team that was favorite to win the grand final last year ,we had 6 new players of which 2 hadnt player for a year.Apart from 2 x 5minute spells in the 1st qtr and 4th qtr we were in the game . Charlie sadly had a bad game ,give the guy a break it was the first game of the year ,lets see what happens in the next 7 rounds Give the team some credit ,we sound like Richmond supporters
I thought we were hard at the football but easy to play against if that makes sense.
Primarily because we lacked aggression at the opponent. We suffered because the likes of Nankervis, Grimes, Balta and Riewoldt were focused on taking our players out of the contest and we had nobody responding in kind.
LP...Tigers move it quick and even use the tap on to advantage to keep the ball rolling their way.....they love that overlap play with the joe the goose goal and work hard for each other to make it happen.
Its a supporter nightmare watching it unfold as you can see 2-3 plays ahead whats going to happen if they get the break after those tap ons to advantage.
Ed is a tagger but doesnt have much offensive nous and plays old school footy. Charlie looked like he was expecting the ball to find him rather than him get the ball and maybe the bathwater got a bit high and he has been swallowing it rather than bathing in it....
Charlie might have been expecting the ball to come to him, but even when it did, he couldnt take a grab.
Probably the worst game Ive seen from CC. Willing to forgive him a bit given his potential, but he is going to have to start taking his game to the next level. 22yrs old, has showed what he is capable of in brief spurts, but the excitement needs to translate into form and consistency.
IMO, Bolton is a coach in the Clarkson / Neil Craig mold, with a preference for systems, possession footy, hitting up a loose man etc. I don't think the Ratten / Dimma freewheeling approach is his thing. Whether this is ideological, or he doesn't trust himself or the team, I don't know.
Like any style / game plan, it looks great when it comes off, awful when it doesn't.
I don't think we have the foot skills for the free-wheeling game style, which probably means we are even more likely to lose shoot-outs.
What did you think of Plowman's first game back from long term injury, I thought his lack of pace was showed up last night? To me it's a big concern in the absence of Docherty because none of the replacements are real quick as such!
Was it just me or did those new high tech jumpers look saturated after just five minutes?
A real concern for me is this;
It looks like the Nthmond VFL structures and tactics mirrored the AFL structures, Teague and a bunch of our MC were at the VFL game as reported in the VFL thread, yet come AFL game time we looked basically unprepared for what Nthmond did!
The mantra of Malthouse was to coach against your opponents tactics, and counter punch with your own. We aren't doing that.
Bolton is simply trying to get the team playing "our brand" IMHO.
That means we are going to have times where WE are negated and have to adjust. That in itself is positive.
For those people asking questions, all you need to do, is look at why we struggled.
1. Execution errors - fumbling and poor disposals.
2. Decision making - Choosing incorrect options either by opposition tactic, or lack of composure.
3. Lack of ability to stop the opposition run on at times due to panic
4. A lack of contriubtion from a few too many players at times.
All of it is fixable, and all of it was resolved for at least 2 quarters of the match against a fancied premiership team with a quarter of the team that played making their Carlton debut meaning a lack of synergy.
Its not all doom and gloom, and the 3 things that cost us dearly are fixed with a bit of time and some hard work.
That means that Bolton knows exactly where we were going wrong, and how we can resolve it to improve and become a threat. The players do too, and part of that equation is to simply get a bit more output from at least 6 more players on game day.
Chin up. Theres always next week.
One final thing;
How poor is the broadcast, I switched on Foxtel and it was Lyon's Losers, a vomit fest of back-dooring bastards.
So you tune into Ch7 and it's Brian's Bozos, they make anything ordinary!
So you tune out!
Wtf., is wrong with the AFL, can't they see that the quality of the product depends on the caller?
Further, getting players to comment on games is most self-serving media rubbish. FFS, can't they employ some people that have something intelligible and meaningful to say?
BT's barracking in the first quarter with his endless "percent gags" was pathetic...
BT's barracking in the first quarter with his endless "percent gags" was pathetic...
I missed the first quarter. How long did it take Bozo to mention how many no. 1 draft picks we had out there? I had money on the 7 minute mark.
I don't think we have the foot skills for the free-wheeling game style, which probably means we are even more likely to lose shoot-outs.
What did you think of Plowman's first game back from long term injury, I thought his lack of pace was showed up last night? To me it's a big concern in the absence of Docherty because none of the replacements are real quick as such!
I would have thought that foot skills are more critical in the Clarkson "precision passing" style ? IMO, you need less skill playing chaos footy like Richmond.
I'm one of the few on here who is a Plowman fan. He looked a little rusty, but he's a good player IMO. But I would give him and all our slow defenders the same advice - do not, under any circumstances, allow your opponent goal side, because once our defenders get caught in the wrong spot for whatever reason, they simply can't run their opponent down.
I thought Plowman worked hi way into the game.
He seems for me anyway, to be one of those players who you don't necessarily notice too much, but he will bob up and take a nice mark or a nice spoil from time to time. But if you watch him closely he does a lot of good positional work that he probably doesnt get credit for.
If we believe some of what is written on here, this supposed "soft c0ck" player attitude has persisted for at least a decade. Which means that apart from a few like Simmo, Murph, Krooz, many of the "originators" are now long gone. Our list has also turned over several times in these years. All coaches, recruiters, football department people and other support staff have also changed. Yet supposedly this problem persists ? All because all of a little bloke who couldn't scare a school girl ? Gee, he must pretty tough if he can hold influence over other players, coaches, recruiters etc.
I call BS. Massive, massive BS.
As I said, common theme since he has been at the club. Yet he is lauded as a club great and an A grade player by some here and in the media. Give me a break!
I would have thought that foot skills are more critical in the Clarkson "precision passing" style ? IMO, you need less skill playing chaos footy like Richmond.
I'm one of the few on here who is a Plowman fan. He looked a little rusty, but he's a good player IMO. But I would give him and all our slow defenders the same advice - do not, under any circumstances, allow your opponent goal side, because once our defenders get caught in the wrong spot for whatever reason, they simply can't run their opponent down.
Agree on Plowman..looked a bit slow but that can be put down to being rusty as you say....laid a very good tackle on Dusty.
A bit different to our other defenders in that he is a lock down type only and not a rebounder IMO, but you need a couple of those to compliment your attacking types.
Grimes is that player for Richmond.....
As I said, common theme since he has been at the club. Yet he is lauded as a club great and an A grade player by some here and in the media. Give me a break!
Your position on this matter is an object lesson in how preconceptions act as a prism and an organising field, that influence and colour every thought and belief that follows.
I'm not really sure that Murphy is such a great leader, but that's by the bye. If your belief is true, then Murphy has stooged every senior coach, every assistant coach, every team mate, every co leader and leadership group member, every football department head, every board member ? At no point in his 13/14 year career has anyone been able to toughen him up ? Nobody, even hard nuts like Collins or Malthouse have ever pulled him aside and told him he plays like a girl and needs to harden up ? And if they have told him, then he's stood up to them and ignored them ?
He's never been dropped to the magoos, never been put up for trade, been a captain for several seasons, but has been able to play gently season after season ?
Think for a moment, how improbable that all is.
If we believe some of what is written on here, this supposed "soft c0ck" player attitude has persisted for at least a decade. Which means that apart from a few like Simmo, Murph, Krooz, many of the "originators" are now long gone. Our list has also turned over several times in these years. All coaches, recruiters, football department people and other support staff have also changed. Yet supposedly this problem persists ? All because all of a little bloke who couldn't scare a school girl ? Gee, he must pretty tough if he can hold influence over other players, coaches, recruiters etc.
I call BS. Massive, massive BS.
No it's not BS. Bad cultures linger around. Bolts is a part of it, and maybe even contributes to it.
No it's not BS. Bad cultures linger around. Bolts is a part of it, and maybe even contributes to it.
And yet, Bolton has come from a club that supposedly has an elite culture, and has witnessed it first hand, quite possibly also contributed to it.
But now, he comes to us, and Murphy manages to corrupt him as well ? Introduces him to the "Carlton Way ?"
Classic.
I sat thru both games yesterday and they were eerily similar in a lot of respects. The Richmond pressure, attack on the ball, structure behind the ball, fast spread from the contest and overlap run is very good, and it wore us down in both games.
In contrast we look incredibly haphazard, but the effort is generally very good - there are periods of really good stuff, some individual moments of brilliance, but it is still not a sustainable approach. It's impossible to do for 4 quarters.
Unfortunately cohesion and understanding can only be built over time and guys playing together. What worries me [like a lot of people here] is that it is hard to see what the actual game plan is, and our ball movement through the middle and into our forward line remains a dogs breakfast after 5 years.
One moment stood out for me early in the last quarter when on a fast break Murph had to stop, prop, and do a u turn on the outer wing as their was no in a good position to kick too. Good sides never do this.
The difference in ball handling in both games was stark - we fumble, panic, and give the ball to guys in bad positions way more than they did in both games. The number of uncontested marks taken by their defenders in both games was also way too high.
BB summed it up in the presser:
8 mins of rubbish football resulted in 6 goals. There's the margin.
Luckwise, we kick that goal to make it 7 points, the game is suddenly different perhaps.
Gotta do it better for longer boys and girls, its that simple. Part of doing it longer though is to reduce the number of passengers. After every game, I rate the players out of 10. I have 7 from last nights game that I would rate 4.5 or lower. That's one third of the team, you ain't winning games of football with 7 oxygen thieves out of 22.
And yet, Bolton has come from a club that supposedly has an elite culture, and has witnessed it first hand, quite possibly also contributed to it.
But now, he comes to us, and Murphy manages to corrupt him as well ? Introduces him to the "Carlton Way ?"
Classic.
You ll never win with these two Paul as their agendas are not ours but good luck trying.
I sat thru both games yesterday and they were eerily similar in a lot of respects. The Richmond pressure, attack on the ball, structure behind the ball, fast spread from the contest and overlap run is very good, and it wore us down in both games.
In contrast we look incredibly haphazard, but the effort is generally very good - there are periods of really good stuff, some individual moments of brilliance, but it is still not a sustainable approach. It's impossible to do for 4 quarters.
Unfortunately cohesion and understanding can only be built over time and guys playing together. What worries me [like a lot of people here] is that it is hard to see what the actual game plan is, and our ball movement through the middle and into our forward line remains a dogs breakfast after 5 years.
One moment stood out for me early in the last quarter when on a fast break Murph had to stop, prop, and do a u turn on the outer wing as their was no in a good position to kick too. Good sides never do this.
The difference in ball handling in both games was stark - we fumble, panic, and give the ball to guys in bad positions way more than they did in both games. The number of uncontested marks taken by their defenders in both games was also way too high.
What a great post.
You nailed everything i was thinking!
The effort is definately there, our players as individuals seem like we have the makings of a powerful team but geez we are miles off game plan wise.
The movement of the ball into our f50 is still the worst in the comp and without this addressed we won’t win many games regardless of the development of the young kids.
You ll never win with these two Paul as their agendas are not ours but good luck trying.
No worries bratblue. I have no issue with Spanner or IBWT. Just another pointless stoush on a footy forum. At least this one made me chuckle.
Just rewatched a bit of last night and I have thought about it before, the Tiggers don't have two players tackling one man.
If someone is tackling a player they stand off and wait for the ball to come free.
Our players on the other hand always seem to do 2 or 3 player team tackling. I think this is silly because it takes a player out of the next contest and allows one of the opposition players to become free.
You see it all the time with 2 of our players go hunting the man with the ball only for him to pass it off to his free team mate. It craps me.
U12 stuff.
What a great post.
You nailed everything i was thinking!
The effort is definately there, our players as individuals seem like we have the makings of a powerful team but geez we are miles off game plan wise.
The movement of the ball into our f50 is still the worst in the comp and without this addressed we won’t win many games regardless of the development of the young kids.
Just saw this from the AFL.com live feed which speaks to this directly......
'Richmond was able to move the ball more effectively scoring 54-7 from defensive midfield chains, and leading 67-35 in overall scores from intercepts.'
We scored 1.1 from clean transition out of defence to 8.6. And they were twice as effective as us capitalising on turnovers.
Just think about that for a few moments and it scares the piss out of you!
The deficiences (some of them) should have been addressed over summer with some hard intra club games. A brutal coaching approach to any shortcomings might have achieved more than witnessing some of the intimidation self protection I saw last night
I have no illusions that AFL is a hard game, but I also understand that it is eaten of be eaten, you can't walk off the field and genuinely be everybody's best friend.
It's the Clark Kents who get all the goodies!
Just saw this from the AFL.com live feed which speaks to this directly......
'Richmond was able to move the ball more effectively scoring 54-7 from defensive midfield chains, and leading 67-35 in overall scores from intercepts.'
We scored 1.1 from clean transition out of defence to 8.6. And they were twice as effective as us capitalising on turnovers.
Just think about that for a few moments and it scares the piss out of you!
But how many of those points were from stoopid, cheap turnovers by our players?
Once the ball is turned over cheaply, all our players are generally out of position vs a vs defensive structures and it only takes one extra attacker to all but ensure an easy goal....
But how many of those points were from stoopid, cheap turnovers by our players?
Once the ball is turned over cheaply, all our players are generally out of position vs a vs defensive structures and it only takes one extra attacker to all but ensure an easy goal....
Worse still, we force turnovers then give it back!
There was one in the 2nd or 3rd quarter where we forced a turnover from a kick-out. Weitering marked strongly over an opponent on the point of the center square then sent a bullet like pass inside our F50 for which two blues forked it up. Then Nthmond clean up and send the ball the length of the field, and I hear some commentary spud complain that Weitering didn't push hard enough to get back onto his opponent!
FFS, we have to listen to these dweebs week in and week out!
All I want to see is Weitering taking more contested marks and hitting blokes lace out inside F50, just like he did, and not have to sprint back into our D50 when his team-mates drop the forking chest mark! :o
Nick Reiwoldt is calling Jones' bump on his cousin a weak act lol.
Nick Reiwoldt is calling Jones' bump on his cousin a weak act lol.
Did Nick has his todger out when he made that statement?
Just saw this from the AFL.com live feed which speaks to this directly......
'Richmond was able to move the ball more effectively scoring 54-7 from defensive midfield chains, and leading 67-35 in overall scores from intercepts.'
We scored 1.1 from clean transition out of defence to 8.6. And they were twice as effective as us capitalising on turnovers.
Just think about that for a few moments and it scares the piss out of you!
When Richmond got the ball from defensive scrimmage they suddenly ran forward at speed, spread, creating options allowing them so much space in their f50. We simply have no idea in the same situation, move it slow, go down the line then are forced to bomb it into the f50. In the 4th year why can't we do that. We're not lacking decent players now.
Nothing in that apart from Jack being a sook trying to milk a free kick.
He is possibly the biggest sook in the game now that Goddard has retired.
But how many of those points were from stoopid, cheap turnovers by our players?
Once the ball is turned over cheaply, all our players are generally out of position vs a vs defensive structures and it only takes one extra attacker to all but ensure an easy goal....
I think [but I'm no expert in Champion data] the way to read that data is overall they scored 67 points from our turnovers - which can happen anywhere on the ground. Some of the 54 points they scored from defensive mid field chains would come from a turnover in our i50 that they rebounded to score. But I think this also includes where they take possession in our i50 from a clearance or stoppage, or a kick out.
So there is some duplication in the figure, but I don't know how much. But it correlates with my memory of the game - they moved the ball from our i50 to score at their end on multiple occasions, and I can hardly remember us doing it cleanly all night.
He is possibly the biggest sook in the game now that Goddard has retired.
He was hilarious the other week when he said there is a massive drug problem with today's footballers but there was no problem when he played which was 18 months prior.
Probably repeating a lot of what has been said earlier (which I haven't read all of) but yes, disappointing to fight back and then fall away again but plenty of good signs .....they were the best side last year right up until their loss in the prelim. final and you add in Lynch...we finished dead last with two wins. Patches of the game showed that at our best we can be very competitive. But again, how many times do poor skills absolutely crucify us?
Positives: Walsh, Fisher, Newman, Setterfield. McGovern started poorly but worked his way into the game. McKay a bit the same. And Cripps is a colossus for us and 2, if not 3, Brownlow votes for mine last night. Phillips is very competitive in the ruck but was killed around the ground by Nankervis and that's where we miss Kreuzer.
Negatives: Charlie had an absolute shocker...fumbled, looked slow and lost count of how many marks he dropped. Garlett...why are we trying to convert him to a defender? He doesn't have any defensive aspects to his game at all. Saw him do it countless times in the JLT and again last night where he goes up into a pack for a mark or spoil and ball spills over the back to his direct opponent. Fasolo was poor but it was worth the punt IMO....he'll only get better.
The Mckay shot in the 3rd where he hit the post when we were within about 15 points was crucial. It would've given us more momentum and maybe we might've cashed in more on the absence of Rance.
Nick Reiwoldt is calling Jones' bump on his cousin a weak act lol.
No, fairs fair...Nick would undoubtedly be an expert on weak acts...having played with Steven Baker most of his career.
When Richmond got the ball from defensive scrimmage they suddenly ran forward at speed, spread, creating options allowing them so much space in their f50. We simply have no idea in the same situation, move it slow, go down the line then are forced to bomb it into the f50. In the 4th year why can't we do that. We're not lacking decent players now.
Good call Jim, Tigers work harder than most at the spread and create a lot of easy over the back goals by running and spreading so quick...it has to be part of their game plan how they set up because they move the ball so quickly and they get a lot of cheap goals this way...
We go sideways too much and just look at the next kick/pass rather than two kicks ahead...you also see us with two players contesting the same ball or tackling the same player unlike the Tigers who laways seem to have loose players around the contest and ahead of the ball...
We have the talent now as you suggest we just cant seem to get enough players with smarts to read the play and help their mate out by providing options, its just haphazard and hope to get lucky..
Watch the 3rd qtr again. McGovern is going to be a real assets. Hands are outstanding whether in the air or that wonderful half-volley pick up. Set us up a few times. Means if Charlie keeps struggling forward we can chuck him in the midfield and still be covered for talks forward. Nothing like a free run in the midfield to get form back.
Agree laj...he worked his way into the game nicely and looked a lot cleaner with the ball than most.
Re-watching the reply, so many bitchmond players attack the player before the marking contest that it has to be a deliberate tactic. No wonder there are so many knees done landing awkwardly, becase the impact is out if sync with the ball arriving in the "drop zone". When are the maggots going to wise up to this crap? What happened to "interference in the marking contest"?
Did Nick has his todger out when he made that statement?
Saint Nick will tell you he never had his wang out and believe his own BS. One of the more irrelevant commentators IMO.
He was hilarious the other week when he said there is a massive drug problem with today's footballers but there was no problem when he played which was 18 months prior.
You talking Jack or Nick MBB? Reference to sook since BJ retired was aimed at Jack I think.
You talking Jack or Nick MBB? Reference to sook since BJ retired was aimed at Jack I think.
Nick sorry.
Yeah Jack looked pissed after the match yesterday because he got towels up. Didnt care about the Win.
Nick sorry.
Yeah Jack looked pissed after the match yesterday because he got towels up. Didnt care about the Win.
Jones took him to the cleaners thats for sure. Weiters also had the better of the GC Millionaire also IMO.
As for Charlie, I would have given him in run the ruck to try and get into the game. Probably a stupid idea but the way he is playing at the moment, I surely couldnt hurt.
Jones took him to the cleaners thats for sure. Weiters also had the better of the GC Millionaire also IMO.
As for Charlie, I would have given him in run the ruck to try and get into the game. Probably a stupid idea but the way he is playing at the moment, I surely couldnt hurt.
I don't think it's a dumb idea at all. Ruck, on-ball, backline... anything, just get the kid into the game.
I wonder if something is up in the Curnow family. Ed and Charlie were well down by their own lofty standards, I wonder if something is up. I hope not obviously but something isnt right.
Jones took him to the cleaners thats for sure. Weiters also had the better of the GC Millionaire also IMO.
As for Charlie, I would have given him in run the ruck to try and get into the game. Probably a stupid idea but the way he is playing at the moment, I surely couldnt hurt.
Agree on Jones but Lynch did his job IMO and it wasnt all about kicking goals, Weitering played ok but the presence of Lynch made it harder for us and three goals wasnt a bad return
for a bloke who hasnt played footy for a long time. Tigers didnt have Caddy and I thought Lynch did enough to offset that....
I thought Weeters showed smarts and poise in heavy traffic last night. One day we will be able to play him in his preferred position and we might see how good he can be. Gorilla-minding fullback isn't his go.
I don't think it's a dumb idea at all. Ruck, on-ball, backline... anything, just get the kid into the game
On the ball absolutely, but in the ruck, without the experience of playing in that position, could prove disastrous. I'm thinking injury wise. He couldn't play in the backline right now. Confidence is down and if someone gets hold of him could make it worse.
Jones took him to the cleaners thats for sure. Weiters also had the better of the GC Millionaire also IMO.
As for Charlie, I would have given him in run the ruck to try and get into the game. Probably a stupid idea but the way he is playing at the moment, I surely couldnt hurt.
The Fox boys want Jones hung drawn and quartered!
I thought Weeters showed smarts and poise in heavy traffic last night. One day we will be able to play him in his preferred position and we might see how good he can be. Gorilla-minding fullback isn't his go.
He was ok and more assured than last season..though if Lynch had stuck another couple of those marks and ended up with a bag of five it might not have looked so good for him.
Be interesting how he goes vs Port who are missing Dixon and his likely opponent maybe Jack Watts...I'd expect our man to subdue Watts who is under the pump more than most this season given his poor last season and his off field activities.
Probably repeating a lot of what has been said earlier (which I haven't read all of) but yes, disappointing to fight back and then fall away again but plenty of good signs .....they were the best side last year right up until their loss in the prelim. final and you add in Lynch...we finished dead last with two wins. Patches of the game showed that at our best we can be very competitive. But again, how many times do poor skills absolutely crucify us?
Positives: Walsh, Fisher, Newman, Setterfield. McGovern started poorly but worked his way into the game. McKay a bit the same. And Cripps is a colossus for us and 2, if not 3, Brownlow votes for mine last night. Phillips is very competitive in the ruck but was killed around the ground by Nankervis and that's where we miss Kreuzer.
Negatives: Charlie had an absolute shocker...fumbled, looked slow and lost count of how many marks he dropped. Garlett...why are we trying to convert him to a defender? He doesn't have any defensive aspects to his game at all. Saw him do it countless times in the JLT and again last night where he goes up into a pack for a mark or spoil and ball spills over the back to his direct opponent. Fasolo was poor but it was worth the punt IMO....he'll only get better.
The Mckay shot in the 3rd where he hit the post when we were within about 15 points was crucial. It would've given us more momentum and maybe we might've cashed in more on the absence of Rance.
I think we should look at replacing Garlett in defence with SPS and try Garlett on a wing.
I think we should look at replacing Garlett in defence with SPS and try Garlett on a wing.
I think that SPS in defence would be a waste. One of the few who can deliver the ball consistently. Happy to get rid of Garlett. What about Kennedy? What's happened to him? Last year he was the great white hope. Now he's a nowhere man.
I think we should look at replacing Garlett in defence with SPS and try Garlett on a wing.
SPS in defence? Maybe at the NB's. Im over him TBH.
Petrevski-Seton looks to have got fitter and quicker and his disposal is a lot better....would be a waste taking him out of the middle. I just think with Newman, Simpson and Thomas playing back along with Plowman, Garlett is a liability. If his job isn't to shut a bloke down (which he's no good at anyway), then if he's only getting the ball a dozen or so times in a game he has to be absolutely spot on with it when he gets it...and he's not. I know none of the blokes I've listed have got that breakaway pace but that's not much use if you don't do anything with it.
Divisive player is SPS... Playing on ball looks like he could be anything, but nothing comes of those stylish possessions. I think he needs a defined role to stop him drifting through games. I reckon he is perfect as that player exiting D50 with his evasive skills and kicking. And he's a good tackler when he can be arsed ( he gave up a few times last night).
KISS... When they have the ball you tackle the bloke next to you... When we have it, run and carry to your heart's content. Andrew MacLeod was the best I've ever seen in that role, and this bloke could be just as good. But as a midfielder....far from convinced.
Divisive player is SPS... Playing on ball looks like he could be anything, but nothing comes of those stylish possessions. I think he needs a defined role to stop him drifting through games. I reckon he is perfect as that player exiting D50 with his evasive skills and kicking. And he's a good tackler when he can be arsed ( he gave up a few times last night).
KISS... When they have the ball you tackle the bloke next to you... When we have it, run and carry to your heart's content. Andrew MacLeod was the best I've ever seen in that role, and this bloke could be just as good. But as a midfielder....far from convinced.
I don't think his disposals around the middle are always that damaging either - too many of the short dolly variety for my taste. I like to see what he could do exiting D50 also and his tackling can be very good, as you say, when he can be arsed.
He was hilarious the other week when he said there is a massive drug problem with today's footballers but there was no problem when he played which was 18 months prior.
I'm thinking tools, sharpness, tool sheds not his thing.... ;)
I thought SPS was our best user of the ball.
I thought SPS was our best user of the ball.
At 61.1% DE? As I said I am over him. At one stage in the 1st qtr I think, SPS and Garlett approached the footy on the ground and they both appeared to slow right up and look at the ball, look at each other before one picked it up. For mine that was a good look. Look I don't know what his role is, I'm just a mug observer from over the fence. But to me, his role certainly doesnt involve:
- Body contact
- Picking up a man
- Putting his nose over the footy
- Tackle an opponent
Loves to guard space, lots of it in fact. Pretty good at it too.
The Fox boys want Jones hung drawn and quartered!
I have no idea as to why, considering what Riewoldt was doing to him.
Well done Fly, you got one right ????????????
pre game thread, Flyboy77 said:
“The last 4 clashes with the Tigers...
1. We would have 1 or 2 poor quarters.
2. We get overrun in the last quarter (young blokes getting tired).
Will the trend stop tonight?”
I think that can pretty much be said about any of our games over the past however many years, unfortunately.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/he-went-berserk-how-vicious-mcg-brawl-started-with-free-kick-decision-20190322-p516qg.html
gotta love the Tigers faithful.....
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/he-went-berserk-how-vicious-mcg-brawl-started-with-free-kick-decision-20190322-p516qg.html
gotta love the Tigers faithful.....
I saw that and a seperate one where there was a picture of Eddie Maguire who was talking on TV and a tigers supporter was mooning in the background.
They're all class.
edit
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/03/22/01/11302588-6837161-image-a-30_1553217122758.jpg)
SPS in defence? Maybe at the NB's. Im over him TBH.
I'm 50/50 on him.....talented for sure but he still picks and chooses when he goes and he doesnt provide much impact with the possessions he gets...
Looks stylish but is he effective?
Collingwood and geelong fumbling a bit too.
Looks like its contagious.
Ditto kicking for goal.
At 61.1% DE? As I said I am over him. At one stage in the 1st qtr I think, SPS and Garlett approached the footy on the ground and they both appeared to slow right up and look at the ball, look at each other before one picked it up. For mine that was a good look. Look I don't know what his role is, I'm just a mug observer from over the fence. But to me, his role certainly doesnt involve:
- Body contact
- Picking up a man
- Putting his nose over the footy
- Tackle an opponent
Loves to guard space, lots of it in fact. Pretty good at it too.
I would be careful quoting DE% numbers
Martin 63.3
Cotchin 51.6
Walsh 54.2
De Goey 50
Treloar 61.8
Selwood 52
Dangerfield 59.3
Dahlhaus 66.7
T.Kelly 67.7
Defenders chips it around and have good numbers. Midfielders often bringing the ball inside 50 to a out number.
I would be careful quoting DE% numbers
Martin 63.3
Cotchin 51.6
Walsh 54.2
De Goey 50
Treloar 61.8
Selwood 52
Dangerfield 59.3
Dahlhaus 66.7
T.Kelly 67.7
Defenders chips it around and have good numbers. Midfielders often bringing the ball inside 50 to a out number.
Point taken re DE, the rest of what I stated is still my opinion. As EB stated, he picks and chooses when to go, I'd play him in the VFL for a very long stint.
I would be careful quoting DE% numbers
Martin 63.3
Cotchin 51.6
Walsh 54.2
De Goey 50
Treloar 61.8
Selwood 52
Dangerfield 59.3
Dahlhaus 66.7
T.Kelly 67.7
Defenders chips it around and have good numbers. Midfielders often bringing the ball inside 50 to a out number.
Danger is a real ball butcher but avoids scrutiny as does Selwood as they deliver in the big moments......agree on the defenders having better numbers...eg Newman will have a great DE% but still needs to prove he can defend when the heat is on...
I'm 50/50 on him.....talented for sure but he still picks and chooses when he goes and he doesnt provide much impact with the possessions he gets...
Looks stylish but is he effective?
I actually do like him, but I wonder if we wouldn't be better off trading him to Fremantle for Adam Cera. I would hate for him to have a purple patch then want to go home.
Richmond have an established team that runs out games very well. We have a new team (some huge number of players weren't in the r23 side of last year).
There were a couple of quarters of intent, teamwork and moving the ball quickly. Hopefully we start playing in the first quarter soon.
Does the no runner rule affect us more as we are establishing how we play and players need a few more reminders of what they should be doing v Richmond's established plan where everyone is well practised at it?
I actually do like him, but I wonder if we wouldn't be better off trading him to Fremantle for Adam Cera. I would hate for him to have a purple patch then want to go home.
Again I am no expert but I'd do that in a heartbeat.
Richmond have an established team that runs out games very well. We have a new team (some huge number of players weren't in the r23 side of last year).
There were a couple of quarters of intent, teamwork and moving the ball quickly. Hopefully we start playing in the first quarter soon.
Does the no runner rule affect us more as we are establishing how we play and players need a few more reminders of what they should be doing v Richmond's established plan where everyone is well practised at it?
The cynic in me says yes the Runner not being able to get onto the field more will hurt young teams. That is why the rule was introduced.
They do whatever they can to keep us down.
I think I have become a bitter old man.
Having now watched the full replay I’ll offer some thoughts.
It was almost like watching a different team at times. Q1 and Q4 was like watching 18 individuals run out on the ground and watch the game unfold with minimal effort, no run and no teamwork. Q2 and Q3 the same players worked, ran hard together and tackled with intensity.
When we stopped running we resorted to predictable play that the tigers picked up easily. And it was the same tactic that killed us last year - get a mark, stop, take time, quick long down the line. No run and carry at all in the bad quarters. Richmond just put more players at the drop of the ball and knocked it around until their numbers won out.
Defensively, I’m begging you Bolts - abandon our zone. Players guarding space doesn’t work for us. Our midfield don’t play defensively enough and the lack of pressure exposes the backline who stand off their opponents too much. We might grow to suit the zone as we improve but for now we absolutely must drop an extra man back for most of the game to stop the easy forward movement by the opposition.
The irony of our forward line is that our tall players look quick, are mobile and cover the ground but our small forwards look strong but move slow. Ed is not a small forward. He lacks the speed to chase and isn’t creative enough to seize the moment and play on. Perhaps we could try swapping him and Garlett?
I thought Charlie was below his best, but he was apparently among our players covering the most ground. So he’s working hard but being ineffective. Hopefully gets back into form after this one.
Finally, we’ll done Walsh. A good showing from the lad in his first game.
Was a bit disillusioned when BB replied to a question in the post match presser about the VFL practise game, he said he had been so focussed on the AFL he didn't know what had happened in the VFL.
If BB or his 2ICs had spent 5 minutes looking at the VFL they would have known the oppositions tactics, even so it may have been too late to do anything about it. It's such a rare opportunity to get to live watch an opposition "Reserves" pre-game these days I'm not sure coaches can afford to waste it!
I dont know if its been mentioned on this thread but Fishers tackles on Martin were significant. I wouldnt be surprised if coaches were showing footage of Fishers technique in dealing with the fendoffs before any Richmond game.
It seemed to deflate Martins game as he lost that aura of invincibility with a major part of his game taken away. Well done Fisher and the coaching staff on that one.
It was also good to see Cripps and Fisher working in tandom and it can only get better for us to watch.
I dont know if its been mentioned on this thread but Fishers tackles on Martin were significant. I wouldnt be surprised if coaches were showing footage of Fishers technique in dealing with the fendoffs before any Richmond game.
It seemed to deflate Martins game as he lost that aura of invincibility with a major part of his game taken away. Well done Fisher and the coaching staff on that one.
It was also good to see Cripps and Fisher working in tandom and it can only get better for us to watch.
It was particularly impressive in view of the very different physiques of the two of them. Bluto and Popeye?
It was particularly impressive in view of the very different physiques of the two of them. Bluto and Popeye?
Can Dusty change his behaviour, he's been throwing his arm out so long it's become autonomic, and Fisher showed how to turn it into a weakness?
I think you'll find in the coming weeks more and more players looking for and grab Dusty's arm, at some stage Dusty will get frustrated and raise and elbow instead, then it'll be mid-season holiday time for Dusty!
I think we need to manage our players better. Keep a Cunningham and Samo (for example) out of the midfield for most of the first 3 quarters and then use them in the final quarter.
We definitely need to find a solution to not being able to run out games.
The other thing we should have done was manage the game better in the first quarter when Richmond got a run on. We need to hold onto the ball find the short options and not over-handball - which Bolton rightly pointed out invites pressure. Control the tempo and avoid getting run off your legs chasing tail.
The other thing we should have done was manage the game better in the first quarter when Richmond got a run on. We need to hold onto the ball find the short options and not over-handball - which Bolton rightly pointed out invites pressure. Control the tempo and avoid getting run off your legs chasing tail.
It's obvious to say this results from deficiencies in player experience and skill, but some of it is due to deficiency in training as well.
I found it abhorrent that MM nursed young players through pre-season to avoid collision injuries, it just slows progress in the critical areas of skill development.
You must train the way you want to play, or you'll end up playing the way you train!
Malthouse like him or not knows a thing or two about developing talent.
He's managed to senior coach many into performers. He just didn't do much of it with us.
Regarding stopping the opposition when they get a run on, you need composure to do that, and we were shell shocked for the first quarter. Limited runners and time on field contributes to that.
It also doesn't help that the 6-6-6 rules are conducive to shoot outs.